Lleyton Hewitt has revealed he underwent right hip surgery on Thursday and will be out until the spring.

Hewitt, who said the problem was a torn labrum as well as some ligament damage, had surgery on his left hip for similar reasons in 2008.

“It’s been causing a few problems since the Hopman Cup at the start of the year. Wasn’t an easy decision to make, but one that I felt was necessary right at the moment,” Hewitt told reporters at the Australian Open. “The last one, my bone in my hip at some stage was going to cut the labrum anyway… where this was more a little unlucky where I landed in a position that actually sort of tore it.”

The 28-year-old Australian said the setback had not prompted any thoughts of retirement. “That never went through my mind… otherwise I wouldn’t have had the op straightaway,” he said. “I’ve worked too hard to come back. I feel like I’m hitting the ball as well as I’ve nearly ever hit it.”

But, he joked, “the only thought [was] I thought maybe if I retire now and come back in 12 weeks — you know, Kim and Justine do that, then come back and win slams.”

Hewitt’s ‘retirement’ is expected to end sometime during the clay season.

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP)—Serena Williams ended Justine Henin’s hopes of a Grand Slam title in her return from retirement with a 6-4, 3-6, 6-2 victory in the Australian Open final on Saturday.

Williams withstood a determined challenge from Henin before securing her second straight and fifth Australian Open title overall. It was Williams’ 12th Grand Slam singles championship.

Henin, who had most of the crowd support at Rod Laver Arena, couldn’t match her fellow Belgian Kim Clijsters’ feat of winning in her Grand Slam comeback tournament. Clijsters won last year’s U.S. Open in her return from a two-year retirement after getting married and having a daughter.
 
Williams won the last four games to clinch the championship in just over two hours, falling on her back in celebration after match point.

Still, it was an impressive run by Henin. She lost in the final of the Brisbane International tournament to Clijsters two weeks ago.

The unranked and unseeded Henin then beat four seeded players en route to the Australian Open final, including No. 5 and Olympic gold medalist Elena Dementieva in the second round.

Henin saved two break points to hold for 3-3 in a four-game run in the second set, winning 13 of the last 14 points in a dominant finish to the set. She maintained the superiority early in the deciding set, increasing that to 18 of 19 points before Williams held serve to even the third set at 1-1.

Williams, with her right thigh and left knee heavily taped as it had been for much of the tournament broke Henin to go up 2-1. The two then traded breaks, with Williams going up 3-2, a lead she never relinquished.

Williams used an ace on her second serve to hold for a 4-2 lead, then broke again to move within a game of the title.

The American holds an 8-6 edge in career meetings between the pair, including a 6-2, 6-0 win in Miami in 2008. At the time, it equaled the worst loss for a reigning No. 1, and Henin quit tennis two months later.

Henin won the Australian Open title in 2004. She quit during the 2006 final with stomach problems while trailing Amelie Mauresmo 6-1, 2-0.

Williams’ 12th singles major matched American great Billie Jean King’s career total. King was at the stadium on Saturday night to take part in a pre-match ceremony to honor the 40-year anniversary of Margaret Court’s four Grand Slam tournament wins in 1970.

How would you rate this year’s Australian Open so far? At
the risk of sounding perversely obvious, the first thought that comes to mind is
that there’s been a lot to watch. That’s true for every Grand Slam, of
course, but this one has brought us more than its share of five-set wars of
attrition on the men’s side—watching Marin Cilic alone would have taken 10 hours out of your life—and more than its share of drama and surprise on
the women’s. Remember Roddick-Gonzo? How about Henin-Dementieva?
Tsonga-Almagro, Venus-Li, Serena-Azarenka anyone?

If this year’s Aussie has lacked anything, it’s been a
signature instant classic. We’ve been spoiled over the last decade by the
tournament’s ability to produce these highlight-reel spectacles. Will we get
one from the finals? If we don’t, it won’t be for lack of opportunity. Serena
vs. Justine is the match that the sport hoped to see at the beginning of the
event. And while Roger Federer vs. Andy Murray doesn’t have quite the
name-brand mass appeal that Federer vs. Rafa would have, it’s still the logical endpoint, and a healthy development for the game. If Nadal is going to be
increasingly troubled by injuries going forward, Federer is going to need a new
foil. And you can’t find a better candidate than Murray.

First, there’s been tension between the two guys, more than there
is between Federer and Nadal, who have formed a sort of two-man All Time Great
Club over the last couple of years. Roger and Rafa have embraced the fact that,
after the 2008 Wimbledon final, they’re destined to go down in history
together. While Federer is clearly the king—a fact that Nadal never fails to
point out—losing to someone 13 times tends to make you respect his game. Federer and Murray don’t dislike each other from what I can
tell, but at various times Murray has been irritated by Federer’s “I just need
to figure this kid out” attitude toward him, which he stuck to last season
even after Murray had beaten him two straight times. Murray may have thought:
“If the guy accepts Rafa as a rival, why can’t he at least start to accept me? I’ve got a winning
record against him as well.” That’s what makes this match so intriguing.
Federer wants to show that he really just did need to figure Murray out, that
the king isn’t giving up his throne any time soon; while Murray, the new kid,
the little brother, the heir apparent perhaps, wants to take his first step
into that All Time Great Club. He can only do that by beating Federer where
everyone, including Federer, accepts that it counts, in a major final. And
you only get so many chances in your career to play them.

The second reason to appreciate this match-up, as well as
Murray’s step forward, is that his game is too good, too interesting, for him
not to make that step. The sport has had a versatile and stylish player at the
top of the rankings for the better part of six years. I like Juan Martin del
Potro as much as anyone, and I can be awed by his brute force, but it would be
nice to think that Murray can continue the Federer tradition and contend for
majors with a more subtle and artful game. More than del Potro and virtually
everyone else on the tour today, Murray has the complete tennis skill set; the
problem for him at the majors has been finding a way to put this advantage to
use, to put himself in offensive positions and use his hands and touch and variety to finish points rather than just extend them. From Murray’s perspective, that will be the big question tomorrow night. At the World Tour Finals a couple months ago, he played
passively against Federer and relied on his ability to run balls down and put his opponent in uncomfortable positions. It worked for a set, but it didn’t
work for the next two sets, as Federer, like a man picking a lock, finally
found the right combination of aggression and patience. He won the third set
going away. Murray is going to have to do more than rely on his legs tomorrow night. He can’t give Federer three sets to pick the lock again.

From Federer’s perspective, he must believe that the match
will be on his racquet—he said as much about his encounters with Murray the
last time they played. He comes in, as usual, in very good form. He blazed out
of the gates against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in their semifinal, looking like a man
happy and relaxed after surviving a scare, which he had, against Nikolay
Davydenko in the previous round. Federer was so good, in such casual control,
that it reminded me of his performances from the 2004 Australian Open, a
tournament in which he basically toyed with the rest of the world’s best
players. I wonder: Federer will be 29 this year, but has he declined in any way
from his form of six years ago? Right now, I’d say that the only reason that he
hasn’t been quite as dominant in the last two or three years is that Nadal was
able to lift, for six-month periods at least, himself up to Federer’s level.
Yes, Federer isn’t as dialed in or motivated at the lesser events now,
and he no longer goes on 40-match win streaks, but in the specific
two-week, seven-match, three-out-of-five set context of a Grand Slam, he’s
still in the prime of his career. That’s why, despite Murray’s confidence boost, his younger
legs, and his 6-4 record against Federer, I’m going with the guy who’s done
this 21 times before.

Whoever wins, its hard to think of a match with so much to
appreciate. The simplicity, even off-handedness of Federer’s serve—it really does
look like he’s just tossing the ball up and hitting it. The footwork of Murray,
the way he recovers after a shot, gets his feet dancing a mile a minute, hops
high for a split step, and starts dancing again when he comes down. The way Federer puts his head
into his slice backhand. The balanced and uncluttered way Murray takes his
two-handed backhand back. Federer’s way of ignoring all the laws of technique
as he flies forward to meet a forehand, hits it without bothering to set his
feet, and keeps moving to the net as if he’s never swung at all. And that’s just the
start with these two guys. This match could be an experience, a tennis
immersion.

***

The women’s final won’t be far behind in the appreciation
department. We’ll get Serena’s purposeful glower and Henin’s searchingly intense
eyes. Serena’s serve, equally as simple and equally as effective as Federer’s.
Henin’s backhand, the power of which seems to come from an unknown source
somewhere in her skinny torso. Serena’s invincible ball-striking, which allows
her to hit winners from positions and balance points that leave you scratching
your head. Henin’s way of making every moment look like one of desperation.
Serena’s way of doing what the old cliché says a champion must do: raising her
game from the ashes just when she needs to. Henin’s originality, which has
inspired a cult-like fan following. Serena’s larger-than-life—in a metaphorical
sense—persona, which has also inspired cult-like devotion. Maybe we’ll even get some old-fashioned name-calling, like we did when these two met at the U.S. Open three years ago. See the name that was called here.

Who will win this battle of the cults, or the originals, of
the icons of determination? There are various stats that come into play. Serena
leads the head to head 7-6. Henin beat her at three straight majors in 2007.
Serena helped send Henin off to her sabbatical by beating her—as they say—down
in Key Biscayne in 2008. Serena has been bothered by her legs and has played a
lot of tennis, including teaming with her sister to win the doubles title
(their 11^th major, by the way). Henin has looked shaky for stretches; she needed three sets to beat Kleybanova and Wickmayer, and has struggled with her serve. But in the semis she was lights-out, Henin 2.0, moving forward
at every opportunity and hitting the corners.

One stat and one factor stick out to me as crucial. The first is Henin: Which of the Justines we’ve seen in
Melbourne will show up? How will she serve? As impressive as she’s been, I have my doubts that she’s ready to play at her top level consistently, all the way through, the way she did
in 2007. The second is Serena’s record in Grand Slam finals. It’s 11-3, with two
of those losses coming to her sister and the other coming to a zoned-out Maria
Sharapova at Wimbledon in 2004. The three losses she suffered to Henin in 2007
all came in Slam quarterfinals. Serena plays differently—i.e., much better,
much bolder—in Slam finals.

With anyone else, you’d say that she rises to the occasion. But
thinking of Serena’s final-round performances through the years—against Safina,
against Maria, against Hingis, against Davenport, against her sister—I get the
feeling that Serena believes that the occasion has risen to her. She doesn’t
deserve to be in a Grand Slam final; a Grand Slam final deserves Serena Williams.

Finally, seeing Federer and Serena this week, I’ve been
struck by how inexplicable they are. Federer comes from normal, non-pushy, non-professional-athlete parents, from a country without much of a tennis tradition. And when
he’s playing well, I often find myself unable to explain why, or
exactly what he’s doing to win, other than doing everything right—for me, his smoothness masks his tactics; it makes tennis look too easy to require tactics. As for Serena, she comes from an
even unlikelier tennis background, and her 180-degree turnaround against
Victoria Azarenka only underscores how strange she is as a player. She
couldn’t win a point until she was down 0-4 in the second set; then she couldn’t
lose a point. It wasn’t a matter of nerves or lack of effort or even
particularly bad form—I have no idea how she did it, but she does that kind of
thing all the time. She’s Serena Williams, he’s Roger Federer, that’s all you
need to know. And that’s why I’m picking them to win.

by Bobby Chintapalli, TW Contributing Editor

We knew from the start that, even though it’s not 2002 anymore (look up if you don’t remember those days), the players to watch were Justine 2.0 and Serena 92K. For me they were the two main questions, yet with the Australian Open women’s singles final here, I find myself surprisingly… surprised.

Maybe it was all the yellow, big Maria’s “Powerade blue”, little Maria’s quarterfinal berth, Kim’s “disheveled” play, Ana’s still-crazy toss, Dinara’s denial about her back, Jelena’s un-JJ-like errors, Svetlana’s dozen tweets, poor Elena D. and Flavia, the breadsticks and bagels, the heads in towels, the towels in weird places, the Chinese, the Russians, the line judges and, yes, Pam Shriver. For some reason, for some time, I stopped focusing so much on Serena Williams and Justine Henin.

Luckily the numbers fill in part of the parts I missed and also foretell some of the story that hasn’t been written yet. Many key stats aren’t tracked of course – Justine’s number of aces following an ‘allez’, Serena’s winner-to-bandages ratio, Justine’s break-point conversions based on number of glances at Carlos Rodriguez, Serena’s number of service holds based on number of late-night tweets. Many key stats are tracked – let’s look at those here.

Serves

Women’s ace leader – Serena Williams
Women’s double fault leader – Justine Henin

Total aces for Henin – 23
Total aces for Serena – 53
Average aces/match for all – 2
Average aces/match for Henin – 4
Average aces/match for Serena – 9

Total DFs for Henin – 33
Total DFs for Serena – 9
Average DFs/match for all – 4
Average DFs/match for Henin – 6
Average DFs/match for Serena – 2

Call her Servena, goddess of the serve, because that serve is heavenly. Serena uses it to go for the kill when things are good and to stay alive when things aren’t. Imagine how comforting it must be for her and how demoralizing for her opponents that she knows (and they know) she always has “a couple of aces” up her sleeve. After her semifinal loss against Serena, Na Li said, “I mean, like if she want win the point, just ace.”

Like at the US Open and Wimbledon before that, Serena served the highest number of aces here. Her serve is no-frills – there’s no underwear-tugging pre-serve ritual, no tossing and retossing… just a few quick bounces, a reliable toss and, more likely than for anyone else, an ace… out wide, down the middle, wherever. As usual Serena managed to reach the top of the ace leader list while staying off the double fault leader list. 

Justine, on the other hand, was the double fault leader. We’ve heard the commentators enough to know that’s not as bad as it may seem. For one thing Justine usually double faults because she goes for more on her second serve than others do and not because she gets tentative. While most of her opponents had a faster average first serve speed, only one of them (Yanina Wickmayer) had a faster average second serve speed. Justine’s double fault ‘leadership’ also owes to her retooling of her serve in preparation to hit the green, green grass of Wimbledon with a motion that propels her into the court and toward the net, which is where she wants to finish off more points now.

Volleys

Net approaches won by Justine – 84/127 (66%)
Net approaches won by Serena – 69/97 (71%)

% Points on which Justine approached – 14%
% Points on which Serena approached – 12%

Justine 2.0 is all about Wimbledon and, thus, all about volleying. In preparation for her trip to London, Justine spent some quality time at the net in Melbourne. She won more net approaches than all her opponents. Maybe practice makes perfect, because she also approached more than all but one of her opponents (the once-again-feared Nadia Petrova).

Because of all the talk about the Wimbledonization of Justine’s game, I expected her impressive net stats but was a wee bit surprised by Serena’s, which weren’t too shabby. She approached only a little less than Justine but more than all of her opponents except Victoria Azarenka. When Serena did approach, she won points a little more often than Justine.

Winners & Errors

Winners by Justine – 164
Winners by Serena – 191

Unforced errors by Justine – 225
Unforced errors by Serena – 147

Winner-UFE differential for Justine – Negative 61
Winner-UFE differential for Serena – Positive 44

Serena’s positive winner-to-error differential always makes me smile. (That may say less about Serena’s skills than my lack of a real, non-tennis life.) Watching her play sometimes rough-and-tough tennis, you don’t expect such prim-and-proper numbers. The positive differential owes partly to the fact that aces are included in the winner count. But the rest of it? The rest of it is why she’s Number 1.

Justine is no slouch herself here. She hit more winners than all her opponents except Alisa Kleybanova. Henin also moves and defends well, so Serena’s not likely to hit as many winners against her. If Serena tries to go for more as result, her unforced error count could climb too, making that differential less prim and proper on both ends.

Numbers Schmumbers

As much as stats tell you about aces, winners and volleys, there’s more they can’t tell you, especially when it comes to big matches. How players fill in the gap between what numbers can and can’t show is what separates the great from the Grand Slam champions.

Consider this: Victoria Azarenka was two games away from the match in her quarterfinal loss to Serena and, in the end, lost just three fewer points (102 to 105). Yanina Wickmayer actually won three more points (96 to 93) in her fourth-round loss to Justine. Eventually three points here and there can add up seven Grand Slam titles (Justine) or even 11 (Serena).

Serena already has the most Grand Slam singles titles of any active player, but a win here would take her to a dozen, tying her with Billie Jean King. A win for Justine would extricate her from her tie with the older Williams sister, putting her in a lone second-place spot to the younger Williams sisters (among active players) and one away from Monica Seles’s nine titles.

When Serena and Justine start their 14th match, playing for their 19th combined Grand Slam singles title, with Serena leading the head-to-head 7 to 6, you can forget these numbers and all the rest. Serena for one isn’t manipulating Excel pivot tables as she waits in the locker room, and she isn’t thinking about percentage of net approaches won against Petra Kvitova (100 percent) once she gets onto the court: “I just go out and do whatever I can. Whatever happens, it’s all I can do at that time.” When it comes to the greatest champions on the biggest stages, even the number of winners can’t tell you who’ll do the winning.

Roger Federer is through to the Australian Open final against Andy Murray after defeating Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 6-2, 6-3, 6-2.

Federer feels all the pressure will be on Murray in their meeting on Sunday. Murray, who defeated Marin Cilic 4-6, 6-4, 6-3, 6-2 to reach his second Slam final, will be trying to grab his first major and give Britain its first male Grand Slam winner in 74 years.

“I know Andy would like to win this first title for British tennis in, what is it — 150,000 years?” Federer joked during his courtside interview.

Later, Federer, who will be playing his 22nd Grand Slam final, said, “He’s in his second Grand Slam final now and I think the first one’s always a bit tougher than the second one.

“Now that he didn’t win the first one, I think it doesn’t help for the second one around. Plus he’s playing, you know — me, who’s won many grand slams and has been able to win here three times so I know what it takes and how to do it, which is definitely an advantage.

“I don’t feel the pressure’s really on me having to do it again, because I did it before. I think he really needs it more than I do, so the pressure’s bigger on him.”

Murray leads their head-to-head 6-4, but lost to Federer in the final of the U.S. Open in 2008.

“Without taking anything away from him, I think a few times he played me I wasn’t at my very, very best.” said Federer. “I know some don’t like to hear it and some still don’t believe me for some reason… We had some close matches on many occasions where I thought I was in control and I ended up giving the match away by making errors of my own.”

But, Federer conceded, “That was definitely because of his play and the way he plays.”

Medical tests have shown Rafael Nadal has a small tendon tear and will be out of competition for four weeks, his management announced today.

Nadal will be able to to resume practicing in two weeks’ time.

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP)—Rafael Nadal will miss up to four weeks of competition to recover from a knee injury that forced him to quit in the third set of his Australian Open quarterfinal against Andy Murray.

Nadal had his right knee assessed in Spain and was advised to rest completely for two weeks, then return to tournament play two weeks after that, his management said in a statement Friday.

Nadal said it was not the recurrence of the tendinitis that sidelined him for periods of 2009, including Wimbledon.

By Jackie Roe, TW Social Director

Welcome to an early edition of the Deuce Club! I’m so glad you were all able to make it, despite the change in scheduling; during the regular DC time slot, we’ll be featuring Bobby’s C’s own preview of the AO ladies’ final. That should be a lively discussion, so make sure to stick around ’til then.

Are you guys as geared up as I am for the AO finals this weekend? I’ve been following the tournament non-stop (read: I haven’t had a full night’s sleep since it started), and the competitive match-ups this weekend look to be a fitting culmination of a dramatic, surprising, and endlessly entertaining couple of weeks. How will y’all experience finals weekend? Are you watching the matches live or recording them for later? Will you be alone or with others? Posting observations here on TW (or social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter) or staying far away from the Internet?

Just like last year – and pretty much every day since the tournament began – I’ll be glued to my tube, watching the matches live. Considering no one else in their right mind would want to wake up (or stay up) to tune in with me, I’ll be by my lonesome, but with TW up so I can share the experience with my tennis friends. Dress of choice? PJs. Drink of choice? Hot tea. I sound like such an old maid …

Aside from telling us what your finals plans are, I thought we could also use this space to reflect on this year’s AO. If you had to sum up this tournament in one word or phrase, what would it be? (Mine would probably be something like “the more things change, the more they stay the same,” though I have a feeling I used that one just last year … )

I’m also reprising a couple of topics from last Friday’s post, since your responses may have changed based on the past week’s happenings: What ended up being your favorite match of the tournament? What were your thoughts on the TV coverage? And how did you fare in the TAT Suicide Pool?

Re: the coverage, I was actually really pleased with it this year. Between ESPN2 and ESPN360.com (a true godsend!), I was able to catch every match I had an interest in. I give the video packages a big thumbs up, too; I’m a sucker for those, in general, but this tournament’s were especially creative. Aside from the hilarious Andy Roddick tantrum vid I referenced last week, my favorite might have been the one on Justine Henin’s return, set to OneRepublic’s “All the Right Moves.” Well done!

Before I turn things over to you, I’ve got one last lil’ treat: Just for the heck of it, I thought I’d share some funny videos of our four finalists. Maybe after seeing these, you’ll change your mind about your rooting interests? (All together now – HA!)

Serena, the dancing queen: http://tinyurl.com/bgnvhw

Justine’s got pipes: http://tinyurl.com/qamdc5

Andy M. takes on a whoopee cushion: http://tinyurl.com/lrh6bo

Roger catching a case of the giggles: http://tinyurl.com/y869acu

Enjoy, and let’s keep our fingers crossed for some smashing tennis this weekend!

Serena and Venus Williams have won the Australian Open women’s doubles, beating top seeds Cara Black and Liezel Huber 6-4, 6-3.

It is the sisters’ fourth Australian Open doubles title and 11th Grand Slam double title. Serena will also contest the women’s singles final on Saturday.

After arriving in Barcelona to undergo tests on his knee, Rafael Nadal tells reporters he is “not worried” about the injury.

“I have a little tweak and I hope to have recovered in a week or even less,” he said.